Article Text
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has strained healthcare resources the world over, requiring healthcare providers to make resource allocation decisions under extraordinary pressures. A year later, our understanding of COVID-19 has advanced, but our process for making ethical decisions surrounding resource allocation has not. During the first wave of the pandemic, our institution uniformly ramped-down clinical activity to accommodate the anticipated demands of COVID-19, resulting in resource waste and inefficiency. In preparation for the second wave, we sought to make such ramp down decisions more prudently and ethically. We report the development of a tool that can be used to make fair and ethical decisions in times of resource scarcity. We formed an interprofessional team to develop and use this tool to ensure that a diverse range of stakeholder perspectives were represented in this development process. This team, called the clinical activity recovery team, established institutional objectives that were combined with well-established procedural values, substantive ethical principles and decision-making criteria by using a variation on the well-known accountability for reasonableness ethical framework. The result of this is a stepwise, semiquantitative, ethical decision tool that can be applied to resource allocation challenges in order to reach fair and ethically defensible decisions. This ethical decision tool can be applied in various contexts and may prove useful at both the institutional and the departmental level; indeed this is how it is applied at our centre. As the second wave of COVID-19 strains healthcare resources, this tool can help clinical leaders to make fair decisions.
- allocation of health care resources
- clinical ethics
- COVID-19
- decision-making
- surgery
Data availability statement
There are no data in this work.
This article is made freely available for personal use in accordance with BMJ’s website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Drawing the line in clinical treatment of companion animals: recommendations from an ethics working party
- Electronic monitoring of potential adverse drug events related to lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine during the first wave of COVID-19
- Evaluating interventions to improve ethical decision making in clinical practice: a review of the literature and reflections on the challenges posed
- Real-time automated paging and decision support for critical laboratory abnormalities
- ESMO Management and treatment adapted recommendations in the COVID-19 era: Pancreatic Cancer
- Process and consensus: ethical decision-making in the infertility clinic—a qualitative study
- Let's talk about veterinary ethics: developing tools, finding spaces and recognising institutional responsibilities
- Prehospital emergency care in a humanitarian environment: an overview of the ethical considerations
- Ethical climate in contemporary paediatric intensive care
- ‘A band of brothers’—an exploration of the range of medical ethical issues faced by British senior military clinicians on deployment to Afghanistan: a qualitative study